Posting this by request — if you participate, lemme know!

Single, married, or in a relationship that needs a bit of juice?

Have you been involved in clinical trials for drugs meant to treat Female
Sexual Dysfunction (FSD)/low-libido?

If so, we’d like to talk to you. We are an award-winning documentary
production company making a film on FSD and pharmaceuticals.

If you have been or are currently involved in trials of Bremelanotide,
Flibanserin, Intrinsa, and other drugs meant to treat FSD, please contact
Marion at Cogent/Benger Productions.

mgruner@cogentbenger.com

Telephone: (416)535-5394 (call collect and we’ll accept the charges).

Cute little blurb on the Smart Mobs blog about people using the Internet instead of having a romantic partner — for a while:

Smart Mobs » So, are you and the Internet a thing?
A new poll shows that nearly 1 in 4 Americans say the Internet could be a stand-in for a significant other for a period of time. Among singles, the percentage was even higher: 31 percent. [via News.com]

The poll examined people’s attitudes about the Internet. Results of the online survey, conducted by Zogby International and 463 Communications, were released Wednesday.

The survey also found that there are people willing to have a device implanted in their brain–safely, of course–so they’d have ready access to the Internet. About 11 percent of respondents said so.

Hrm. I suppose before the internet, if you were taking a break from dating, or recovering from heartbreak, or not interested in anyone at the moment, or not in the mood to go do things that put you in the way of cute people of the sexes and genders that attract you, you filled your time in other ways. Reading, maybe. Knitting. Sports. Television. A hobby or extra job or family and friends and so on.

Now, we have the internet as an option, with all the information, learning, social interaction, porn, entertainment, and so on and so forth … seems to me a perfectly respectable thing to spend time with. And it also seems like a good idea to me to not be pursuing a romantic relationship if you’re happier without one, for a temporary period or for always.

So. Hooray for you, 31 percent of singles who are happy to play online when you’re on hiatus.

I’m not in the mood to talk about the 25 percent of non-singles who said the same thing as I am sneak-blogging from a client meeting and this topic is bigger than the singles bit. [Especially when we don’t know if they mean “use the internet to communicate with partners when can’t be together (i.e., traveling, military deployment)” or if they mean “I need a break from my partners for a while so I’m just gonna play WoW.”]

Hooray! Gee, I wonder if they read the latest Sex Drive (Proposed Law Could Be Cold Shower for YouPorn) and made up their minds real fast? Heh heh.

6th Circuit Court of Appeals Rules 2257 Unconstitutional
CINCINNATI - The United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled today in the case of Connection Distributing Co. et. al. v. Keisler that the federal 2257 record-keeping statute is unconstitutional and overbroad.

“This is huge, huge news for the entire industry,” attorney J. Michael Murray told AVN. “It means that the statute has been declared unconstitutional in its entirety, at least in the 6th Circuit. This is the result we’ve all been aiming for; it’s a monumental victory. We’ve been fighting this battle for twelve long years, and this is the third time I argued the case on the 6th Circuit. Finally, we got a court to agree with us.”

A sister company to Cleveland-based video distributor GVA-TWN, the now-defunct Connection published approximately a dozen swinger’s magazines with personal ads containing sexually explicit photographs.

[snip]

“For the first time time in at least a dozen years, we have judges that are digging deep to look at the fundamentals of section 2257,” Lee noted. “And as we have always thought, when they do so, they will find them wanting. When the analysis gets down to the level that these judges assess 2257 on, we’re beyond the particulars of swingers magazines vs. videos vs. internet – this is a very fundamental level, and it’s holding that the statute is flawed in the way it imposes burdens on everybody that has anything to do with this type of expression.”

Although the ruling applies only in the 6th Circuit (Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee), Lee feels the case sets an important and gratifying precedent in the battle against 2257.

“The government says that its interest behind 2257 is in combating child porn,” Lee explained. “The problem is that virtually all of what 2257 applies to is not child porn. Each of the [three judges’] opinions today holds that 2257 is not narrowly tailored to an interest in suppressing child porn, because it applies to so much that is not child porn. This has been one of the fundamental objections to section 2257 all along.”

Thanks, Randall. I think this is kinda hot.

Just like science is always finding out that animals are more complex, intelligent, organized, playful, etc. than humans used to admit, we’re also often surprised that humans are more animal than we like to admit.

Lap dancers ‘in heat’ are the ones to watch - being-human - 11 October 2007 - New Scientist
Last month, biologist Randy Thornhill challenged the orthodoxy that women do not undergo regular bouts of hormone-induced oestrus, or “heat”, when they are at their most fertile - something most female mammals experience (New Scientist, 15 September, p 18). Now a study of the tips men give to lap dancers, conducted by a colleague of Thornhill’s, lends further support to the argument for oestrus.

Geoffrey Miller and his team at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, compared the earnings of lap dancers who were menstruating naturally with those of dancers taking the hormonal contraceptive pill. During the non-fertile periods of their menstrual cycle, both sets of dancers earned similar tips. But when naturally cycling lap dancers entered their fertile period they earned significantly more in tips than their co-workers on the pill (Evolution and Human Behavior, DOI: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.06.002).

I once had a traditional Chinese medicine doctor explain to me that I couldn’t possibly have PMS because the pill negates the cycle — not having cycles meant I couldn’t possibly have PMS.

I almost invited him to move in with me for a month to do a study, but I was PMSing at the time and didn’t feel like helping him expand his horizons.

It’s funny. I’ve noticed that Wired News editors often use “dildo” when they want to refer to a generic sex toy, like in this recent headline Chaste Home, Alabama, Where You Can’t Buy a Dildo, and like the Editor-in-Chief’s request last year that I not do any “dildo reviews” in the column.

But I don’t think of dildos very often. Not because I don’t like them, but because I don’t think of them as particularly techie — you can use a cucumber or a smooth piece of driftwood for the same purpose. When I want a generic example of a sex toy, I tend to think of devices that move, whether it’s a vibrator or a machine or a pogo stick. If a dildo is involved at all, it’s just the attachment, the accessory, even the afterthought.

And then I started to wonder. Is this a male/female thing? Do men think “dildo” right away because it’s the thing that most resembles them? And do women think “something that moves” because that’s what gets us going?

Funny how it’s okay to get sexy with boobies if it’s for breast cancer research.

Cleavage Creek Cellars - Celebrating Life & Wine
Welcome to Cleavage Creek, a winery that’s passionate about celebrating life and fine wine. Owner Budge Brown and Cleavage Creek are dedicated to making exceptional wines and to fighting breast cancer. 10% of the gross proceeds of all wine sales will be donated to breast cancer research. Enjoy the fine wines of Cleavage Creek and be a part of an effort to beat breast cancer.

Yay boobies! Yay wine!

About three weeks ago I decided to shave my legs, which I’d stopped doing around the first of the year. There was no Deep Meaning to either decision — to stop shaving or to start again. I just didn’t feel like it for a long time. And then I felt like it again. And yes, I wear dresses and skirts and bathing suits all the time, so I wasn’t hiding anything.

Sometime early in summer I started shaving my labia. Not the “bush,” just the underneath. But I can’t remember when or how often or whether I shaved my armpits.

And you know what? There was *no difference whatsoever* in whether men expressed interest in me or not. Incredibly hot men, no less. NOBODY MALE CARED. Women, though, either approved or disapproved, sometimes vocally.

So Dr. Marty Klein’s blog post about women telling other women that they should or shouldn’t wax, shave, pluck, paint, pierce or whatever their whatevers struck a chord, particularly the bit about “you’re just doing it because men want you to.” Honestly, most men just don’t care about that sorta stuff nearly as much as most women seem to think they do.

Even in Los Angeles.

Women Who Diss Women Who Wax « Sexual Intelligence
Some women get tattoos or nipple rings, or bleach their anuses or shave their pubic hair, for the wrong reasons—say, pressure from a boyfriend, or a belief that their bodies are ugly or non-feminine.

Some reasons aren’t wrong, just inane—“I dunno, we were all drunk and Mary did it, so I figured what the hell.”

But plenty of women do this stuff because they want to—it feels good, or they think it looks good, it makes them feel sexy, it’s a form of rebellion, their sex partner likes it, it makes wearing a thong easier, whatever.

Unfortunately, a rising chorus of so-called feminists and gender theorists are dissing women who make the “wrong” choices about these things. Claiming they know women better than they know themselves, they decry women who shave, wax, implant, bleach, pierce, or otherwise change their sexual bodies.

Continued…

I was sick today — not sure why, but so exhausted I could not even get out of bed to call in sick until 1pm — so I was unable to attend Arse Elektronika. I’m *determined* to go tomorrow.

But awesome photographer Lane Hartwell got some great pics at last night’s opening, and sent photos and notes about what was goin’ on, which I then polished into copy, and we posted it at Wired’s Underwire blog. (Yeah, it’s my name on the post, but Lane did most of the work and I’m not trying to steal credit - I wasn’t able to go last night or today and am not pretending I did.)(Heh.)(Here’s Lane’s post from yesterday with other pics.)

C’mon, mainstream! We’re all waiting for you to catch up. Remember when the World Wide Web was new? The 3-D internet is to the web what the web was to BBSes, so don’t be so afraid to take it seriously.

I liked this piece in the Washington Post about how people are using virtual worlds as a catalyst for good, wholesome, healthy stuff. Naturally there’s the warnings about the danger … omg we don’t know enough about it yet … etc. But you know as well as I do that the internet, the 3-D internet in particular, is comprised of (gasp) people. What’s so scary about that?

That’s rhetorical, btw.

Real Hope in a Virtual World
Brown, Salvatierra and Dawley are just a few examples of an increasing number of sick, disabled and troubled people who say virtual worlds are helping them fight their diseases, live with their disabilities and sometimes even begin to recover. Researchers say they are only starting to appreciate the impact of this phenomenon.

“We’re at a major technical and social transition with this technology. It has very recently started to become a very big deal, and we haven’t by any means digested what the implications are,” said William Sims Bainbridge, a social scientist at the National Science Foundation.

In addition to helping individual patients, virtual worlds are being used for a host of other health-related purposes. Medical schools are using them to train doctors. Health departments are using them to test first responders. Researchers are using them to gain insights into how epidemics spread. Health groups are using them to educate the public and raise money.

This week’s column is up.

Someone at Wired not only has a sense of humor around headlines, they know one of my favorite southern fried rock songs … LOL

Chaste Home, Alabama, Where You Can’t Buy a Dildo

Oh, Alabama. What has been done to thee?

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to have anything to do with the infamous Williams v. Alabama case, which has been wending its way through the court system for nine years. In that case, adult retailer Sherri Williams challenged the constitutionality of a state law banning the sale and distribution of any device intended for the purpose of stimulating the human genitals. This week a federal judge is expected to lift the injunction that has prevented the law from being enforced since 1998.

The law was originally intended to shut down certain adult establishments, like strip clubs, so that children wouldn’t have to walk past them on the way to malt shops and sock hops. The sex-toy thing got thrown in so minors wouldn’t be exposed to adult retail shops either, and that’s the part that got national attention. No one outside the local community cares if a strip club gets shut down; start telling women they can’t buy vibrators, and the angry murmurs begin.

Continued…

Thank you Kathryn for making me snort my Peet’s Americano out my nose with your “first thought”:

Stone Deaf Pilots- the deaf tech blog
I just discovered DeafBunny (NSFW), a deaf-owned adult entertainment company that films porn using deaf actors that communicate with each other in American Sign Language. There are even subtitles if your sign isn’t very good. Looks like they only have one movie so far - Naughty Deaf Roommates.

My first thought: “Huh, so that’s what they talk about in porn.” Interesting idea. I hope they keep it up.

It’s interesting that this hasn’t happened already, or I guess if it did, we didn’t notice. Because porn is about the visual first, the audio second, and what is more visual than sign language? And why wouldn’t sign language be a wonderfully expressive element to add to lovemaking, even if you can hear?

Now there’s a thought … Kathryn, you taught me some other important signs (heh), perhaps it’s time for a lesson in sign language erotica. And if there isn’t any? Let’s create some.

I’ve noticed that in so much of the coverage of the Warren Jeffs case — Jeffs is the Utah Mormon who forced a 14-year-old girl to marry her first cousin and who has just been convicted of being an accomplice to rape — the media confuses “polygamy” with “abuse.”

Forcing someone into sex or marriage is wrong, whether it’s a plural marriage or a single marriage. Forcing a child into sex or marriage is wrong. Abusing a spouse or child or anyone else is also wrong.

But plain ol’ polygamy is no more inherently right or wrong than monogamy. The issues in the Jeffs case are child abuse, sexual abuse, coercion, corruption, brainwashing.

Polygamy? So what. Anyone crazy enough to love multiple spouses deserves ‘em. Heh heh.

I haven’t been able to blog this all day, I’ve been so … annoyed. And surprised. And disappointed. And surprised that I was surprised.

The Associated Press: Court Leaves Ala. Sex Toy Ban Intact
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear a challenge to Alabama’s ban on the sale of sex toys, ending a nine-year legal battle and sending a warning to store owners to clean off their shelves.

An adult-store owner had asked the justices to throw out the law as an unconstitutional intrusion into the privacy of the bedroom. But the Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal, leaving intact a lower court ruling that upheld the law.

[snip]

Alabama’s anti-obscenity law, enacted in 1998, bans the distribution of “any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs for anything of pecuniary value.”

The law does not ban the possession of sex toys, and it doesn’t regulate other items, including condoms or virility drugs. Residents may legally purchase sex toys out of state for use in Alabama, or they may buy sexual devices in Alabama that have a “bona fide medical” purpose.

I’m going to save the rant for this week’s Sex Drive column.

Apparently the injunction will lift in a couple of days, giving shopkeepers time to clear their shelves. (My friend Seth says “They should have a big SCOTUS sale” — I think he’s right, and can see the signs now: “Get Off While You Still Can” and “Government Says Only Your Hand Or Your Man”)

In the meantime, my Alabama sistren and brethren, if you make a trip out to California, I’d be happy to show you some wonderful sex-positive shops where you can learn all kinds of things about enhancing your sexual experience and relationships. You won’t even have to corrupt any children.

Image: “Paris,” from Big Teaze Toys